ABSTRACT
Just as the proper context for understanding a single sign is acode (a set of signs and rules for their use), so the proper context for understanding a single code is a culture (a set of codes and rules for their use). No culture is made up of only a single isolated code, no matter how complex it may be. Different cultures share the basic types of codes they incorporate; language, food, clothing, and objects are only the beginning, but they are aH basic codes included in every culture. Initially signs were treated as discrete units for purposes of introduction, but ultimately they must be understood as integrally related. Similarly, codes were presented as separable units for purposes of introduction. Although useful analytically, this is not how they actually exist: In sociallife codes are woven together as a coherent whole in intricate and mutually-influencing ways. Together they make up what is sometimes termed the social fabric, a metaphor valuable particularly for its emphasis on the extent to which the various parts of life forro a single coherent whole. 1
"Individual sign systems, although they presuppose imroanendy organized structures, function only in unity, supported by one another" (Uspensky et al., 1973, p. 1). Just as a sign requires knowledge of the appropriate code for interpretation, so acode requires familiarity with the appropriate culture. For example, the act of drinking tea, when considered alone, conveys but little; understanding the implications of choosing tea over coffee, or water, or beer for members of a particular group conveys a litde more. However, eventually tea must be understood in relation to particular objects (the cup, or mug, or glass in which it is presented, the table on which it stands, the implement with which it is stirred, etc.). The person drinking the tea wears particular clothing while holding the cup, or mug, or glass, and so either the objects or the clothes can become a majar contributing factor in the evento
As Glassie (1991) pointed out, "The collection is our key expressive mode. Others make up the parts, but we make the wholes" (p. 264). He spoke here of collections formed within the boundaries of a single code; his statement takes on even greater significance when applied to that most human of activities, bringing elements of different codes into coherent arrangement as a new whole that speaks to us and for us to others. Just as it is a creative act to make a new actuality out of old possibilities within codes, so it is equally (if not more) creative to make a new whole combining and contrasting elements drawn from separate codeso In both cases people participate in an act of creativity through synthesis. We make separable parts that are individually meaningful into new wholes, creating new meanings as we go.
